LEO RETORTS

Blasting Blog Comments

I received an e-mail on October 18th from our buddy, Leo Coughlin, who said the following:

“You have the following posted on your blog and this is to inform you that it erroneously is attributed as appearing on the news web site I edit, LeoReports (www.leoreports.com). Because it is falsely attributed and you may not know this from an anonymous poster, you would be well advised to remove immediately any connection of this with LeoReports. I understand that, in editing an influential news web site that thousands of people in the area depend on for news, there will be criticism directed my way and this is fine. But please don't post material falsely attributed to the LeoReports news web site.”

Technically, IRBeHEARD is NOT REQUIRED to do squat about what Coughlin claims to be an erroneous posting. According to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

IRBeHEARD prides itself on the fact that posted comments are not censored in any way, shape or form. However, we certainly don’t want to hurt the reputation or credibility of such an influential news source, so we deleted it. Apologies to whoever posted it for doing so. If the commenter would care to repost it anonymously, hands off on this end.

Hmmm...Leo is considered the press? Does that mean that IRBTV would fit into the same category? IRBTV is a group of residents who are interested in bringing more transparency to our local government by streaming video of the commission meetings. With the exception of Commissioner Valery, opposition abounds.

P.S. Anyone have any ideas about the identity of the “Private Caller” who called my house on Sunday morning at 5:30 a.m. and hung up.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

WHAT'S GOOD FOR IRB GOOSE

Isn’t Necessarily Good for IRB Gander

Selective Code Enforcement
A resident on Legion Lane (behind City Hall) was spotted by our selectively sharp-eyed code enforcer and cited for adding a railing to her steps. She was ordered to apply for a variance and pay triple permit fees. At the variance hearing, the City Attorney opined that a variance was not needed because it was only a minor improvement, yet the commission went ahead and voted anyway. Why didn’t the planning staff, building inspector, City Manager, etc. know the code? Did the commission vote on this unnecessary variance to avoid refunding this resident’s money? How is it that code enforcement spots a railing but fails to notice that the Mayor rarely cuts his grass? Most importantly, why didn’t any commissioner go to bat for this applicant? Isn't anyone sitting on the commission working for us?

Selective Law Enforcement
Economy is down. Unemployment and crime are up, yet IRB has less police protection. And, one of our officers sits at nearly every commisison meeting just in case someone gets out of line.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

SURPRISING PREZ CANDIDATE

It’s Someone You Know

For those who were hoping a third choice for President would emerge, your prayers have been answered. And, it’s someone from right here in IRB…would you believe? Click on the link below and check it out…

http://www.tsgnet.com/pres.php?id=46832&altf=Tdpuu&altl=Tibqjsp

TRUE COLORS

Whole Lot of "Leaving" Going On

Does anyone else, besides me, miss seeing the fall leaves? If so, here’s a taste of autumn in the New York Adirondacks. Autumn in all its splendor! [Photo submitted by IRB seasonal resident Lori Henry.]

Speaking of "leaving"...the City Commission voted on Tuesday night to relieve IRB Finance Director Marty Schless of his duties.

Mystery: Tuesday night's agenda item was listed as "Evaluation of City Treasurer." How did an evaluation discussion turn to termination? Did Commissioner Kennedy jump the gun and make an improper motion--a procedural error that, once again, went unnoticed?

Commissioner Kennedy voted NOT to fire Schless some months back and pointed to the lack of a plan as to her reasoning. So what's different now? There still isn't a plan...at least one the public has been made privvy to...yet she changed her vote?

Besides, isn't adoption of a resolution required to fire a charter officer? If so, why wasn't one drafted and passed? The word is that Schless will be staying on for 30 days, but how and when was that decided? It didn't happen at the meeting. And, since Marty reports to the commission, was this decision to keep him on for another month made off the dais and "outside" the sunshine? Was the commission polled by a third party in violation of the Sunshine Law?

What effect, if any, does firing Schless for writing the infamous Grieshaber check have on the City's lawsuit against the former City Manager? Won't Grieshaber now just say..."Hey, it was IRB's misstep, not mine; they even fired their own official over it"?

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

UNTRUTH IN MILLAGE

A THIRD Shot at Setting Millage?

In 1980, the Florida legislature passed the "Truth-in-Millage" (TRIM) Act. The “Notice of Proposed Property Taxes” everyone receives as a result is affectionately known as the dreaded TRIM notice. It informs taxpayers of their tax liability in advance and provides ample opportunity to voice concerns, objections, etc.

The TRIM process is set forth by state statute and has some specific requirements. Setting of the millage rate by IRB is part of the process. Initially, our City Commission, in error, set the millage rate with a supermajority vote on 9/18. They were forced to re-vote unanimously on 9/30 to fix the error. Did the commission not realize that they were jacking our millage above the 110% threshold? Did they not know the rules? The biggest travesty here is NOT in not knowing--that's understandable. It's in not asking questions. Why doesn’t this group ever ask questions from the dais? Are they afraid of the answers? Do they fear appearing ignorant? All five commissioners claim to do a lot of homework behind the scenes. Well, in this case, the dog must have eaten it. How is it that average IRB citizens in the audience seem to know the rules better than those those looking out (and in some cases--down) on the audience?

At the re-hearing on 9/30, a number of citizens voiced their objections to the re-vote taking place that evening, citing specific violations of Florida Statute Chapter 200 entitled “Determination of Millage.” As usual, these "complaints" fell on deaf ears and the re-vote was taken anyway.

The “yowlers” were duly put in their place and informed that the Department of Revenue (DOR), the overseer of the TRIM process, had authorized the City to proceed with the re-hearing. It wasn’t until obtaining a copy of a 10/7 e-mail sent by DOR Attorney Robert Speirs to IRB City Attorney Maura Kiefer that it became clear the department's “blessing” was NOT without qualifiers.

“Dear Madam Kiefer:
I see no requirement for a taxing authority to wait until submission of a TRIM package to the Department for review to re-advertise and re-hold the hearings required under S. 200.065, Florida Statutes, when you, as attorney for the taxing authority, are reasonably certain a violation has occurred. Your description of the course of events sets out a probable violation that would require re-advertising and re-holding of the hearings. It might be a good idea to review the violations listed in the statutes and S. 12D-17.005, Florida Administrative Code, to make doubly sure that no other violation has occurred which might not show up until the submission of the TRIM package.If any such second violation appeared at the time of review, of course, another re-advertisement and re-hearing might be required.”

Attorney Speirs carefully stated that if other violations came to light another “re-do” might be in order. So buckle up for Round 3, if any of the following get caught:

1. The number of days between the adoption of the tentative millage rate on 9/4 and the publication of the St. Petersburg Times advertisement on 9/28 exceeded the maximum 15 days permitted between the two events.

2. The budget published for the FIRST Second/Final Reading on 9/18/08 DID NOT match the budget advertised for the RE-HEARING Second/Final reading held on 9/30/08. (Additional columns/figures were added.)

3. The published notice did not meet the required minimum 2-day notice. Florida Statute 200.065 mandates the meeting be held “not less than 2 days nor more than 5 days” AFTER the day the meeting advertisement is first published. Assuming that two (2) days means forty-eight (48) hours, the City of IRB failed to comply. The notice was published on Sunday. The first day AFTER the Sunday advertisement appeared would have been Monday, which began at 0000 hours and ended at 2400 hours. The second day (Tuesday) started at 0000 hours and ended at 2400 hours. The meeting began at 7:00 p.m. (1900) on Tuesday or about five (5) hours short of the minimum 2-day (48-hour) requirement.

It is no surprise that attendance at the re-vote hearing was noticeably less than at the initial hearing. Citizens received a 4-day notice for the INITIAL Second/Final Reading (published 9/14 for a 9/18 reading) and less than two days notice of the 9/30 re-hearing. In light of new figures added to the published budget, this gave citizens about 16 city business hours to explore the revisions. NOT ONE COMMISSIONER expressed any concern whatsoever that the rights of their constituents may have been compromised. Once again, no one stood up for us. And, the commission's silence may have also compromised IRB's $100,000+ in sales tax revenues in the process. Not a good time to walk away from that much money, is it?

Admittedly, the FY 2008-2009 millage rate for Indian Rocks Beach might well have ended up the same had procedures been followed. But, in light of nearly $1 million in unauthorized loans we are now being asked to repay, following proper procedure is more crucial than ever.

Will the Department of Revenue catch these other violations when IRB files its TRIM package? Better hope not or…here we go again…third time’s a charm.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

IRB CONNECTED

City Launches New Web Site

At the very first IRB City Commission meeting I attended many, many years ago, there was one guy in the house who just wouldn’t shut up about the City’s need for a Web site. Way back then, most meeting attendees--commissioners and citizens alike--greeted the idea with “Yeah…yeah…yeah….we don’t need no stinking Web site.” Yet he persisted.

Had it not been for this one lone voice, we’d still be requesting (and paying for!) hard copies of many documents which are now right at the fingertips of all connected IRB residents—virtually on demand. This forward-looking resident who constructed the City’s first Web site, paid the expenses out of his own pocket and even updated and maintained it in his spare time for years: former Commissioner Jeremiah Carmody.

Jeremiah hung on the legs of his fellow commissioners like a junk yard dog emphasizing the need to “be connected.” Had Jer not picked up the cyber ball and run with it, IRB would never be welcoming the brand new Web site the City launched just last week. While it’s still in the tweaking stages, be sure to check it out if you haven’t already happened upon it:

http://www.indian-rocks-beach.com/

Kudos to Danny Taylor and all those staffers who contributed to its design. It’s graphically pleasing, well organized and user friendly. (Danny & Co.: You’d better get the meeting minutes, after-action agendas, etc. loaded tout de suite; the troops are getting restless out here.)

By pioneering our City's Web site, Jeremiah Carmody taught us the need to look ahead. Next…streaming video of the commission meetings!! Well…maybe first we should get a sound system that allows attendees to actually hear what commissioners and residents are saying. Baby steps.

Thanks, Jeremiah. Your effort to promote open government online has been one of IRB’s most important contributions.

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB

(Note: If you'd like to comment on this posting, simply click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of the article and follow the prompts. You may comment anonymously if you'd like. Or, you can always e-mail your comments to irbeheard@cmdinc.net and we'll post them for you!)

LOVE NOTES TO LEO ON FILM

Must See IRB

Rarely does a comment on IRBeHEARD gets its own posting. Since the comments screen doesn't allow for the inclusion of a live Web site link and we don't want anyone to miss this, we made an exception. Click on this link to see one IRBeHEARDers special video tribute to Leo. It's definitely "Must See IRB."

http://www.careerbuilder.com/monk-e-mail/Default.aspx?mid=28123507&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=b9a62abd585f432fb695cab93c7a0ec6-277025949-RC-4

Nancy Obarski
Beach Trail/IRB